A Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?

[wrobel]

Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics

I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation.

My question is: Is there a standard English name for this velocity?

Spoiler: funny thing

In Russian textbooks $v_e$ denotes the velocity of transport. Nobody knows what the subscript means.

 

[anuttarasammyak]

I do not think so. In the text, "(absolute) velocity of the moving frame" is better.

 

[wrobel]

I do not think so

I was hoping that the name existed. :(

"(absolute) velocity of the moving frame" is better.

The moving frame can for example rotate and its different points can have different velocities. That is why a correct name of this velocity must refer to the point A.

 

[Ibix]

So it's basically the "extra" velocity something like a car's wing mirror has if you subtract the car's COM's velocity? I don't know any standard term for that, no. Can't claim to have made a thorough survey of the literature, though.

 

[Filip Larsen]

The closest term I can think off is advection, e.g. advective flow, where particles are being considered transported due to bulk (average) motion of the medium they are in. But advection starts with a (just like absolute) so less useful for that equation.

What is wrong with calling it transport? It sounds like a perfect good term to me. Are you aware of conflicting terms in use by other authors?

 

[anuttarasammyak]

The moving frame can for example rotate and its different points can have different velocities.

I see. “The moving inertial frame against the original IFR” would eliminate those cases.